2006-08-26 13:42:52 · 12 answers · asked by your mom 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
it's renewable and non-polluting energy source
2006-08-26 13:43:17 · update #1
Well if the Democrat's beloved country of France has it, how could it possibly be bad?!
2006-08-26 13:45:22 · answer #1 · answered by Austin 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I don't know Al Gore's goal. Most people who support his opinions also oppose nuclear power. Nuclear power would be the best way to decrease dependence on oil.
2006-08-26 21:44:35 · answer #2 · answered by STEVEN F 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Nuclear makes sense so I doubt Gore is behind it.
For the person above....we don't just throw the waste wherever we want...it is stored either in the spent fuel pool or in dry cask storage on site.
Terrorists really couldn't do much of anything without having a crane or a really, REALLY big bomb.....both of which are unlikely.
Yucca Mtn is due to open by 2017. What is funny is that most of the democrats have complained that it was supposed to have open by 1999, but of course they don't tell you that they were behind all the lawsuits roadblocking it.
2006-08-26 20:56:30 · answer #3 · answered by jpxc99 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I'm all for nukes, but we needn't praise it on the basis of an imbecile's whimsical claims of calamity resulting from his faith in man's destruction of the earth.
You could have a sugar cube that generates power for the planet, and I-Gore would find a reason to condemn its use.
2006-08-26 20:50:19 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
What we really need is People Power to change the regime in the White House right now!
2006-08-26 20:46:31 · answer #5 · answered by pickle head 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
It's true. It is clean and it is cheap and it is dangerous. France is largely nuclear and has done well with it. I would worry about the possibility of terrorists hitting the plants though.
2006-08-26 20:48:56 · answer #6 · answered by bumpocooper 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
If he took that position I might actually support him. However, like most democrats, he generally just whines and complains without offering any solutions. Maybe he'll do better on this question.
2006-08-26 20:47:43 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Has he stated this goal?
Yes, it's polluting... but it doesn't have to be. We just let them throw the waste wherever they want, but if we regulated it, it would be OK... better than coal, anyway
2006-08-26 20:45:34 · answer #8 · answered by Aleksandr 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
don't know about AL but the coal will run out
by 2045,we better make some changes now.
there are other choices such as wind,solar and
hydro.
2006-08-26 20:49:44 · answer #9 · answered by djf103 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Al Gore has no idea.
He's a joke.
2006-08-26 20:46:51 · answer #10 · answered by John 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋